CONSTRUCTIVISM AS A LEARNING THEORY IN ESP TEACHING
Keywords:
constructivism, English for Specific Purposes (ESP), activity, studentAbstract
English for Specific Purposes (ESP) is part of the overall system of the general English language and is a
medium between profession and science. Professional terminology is the carrier of information in ESP. There is a
high degree of terms use and in order to achieve a linguistic unit, there is a need of communication between the
general lexicon and the professional terminology. English for Specific Purposes is a system of all linguistics used
through communicating that takes place between the professionals who have a certain structure of thoughts.
Teaching should enable students to participate in communicative tasks so that they can build their implicit
knowledge. For the realization of such tasks among students, in this paper, we start from the constructivist theory of
learning, which describes the way of learning, indicates that knowledge and the acquisition of knowledge are
inductive, interactive and collaborative, and emphasizes that questions are valued. Constructivism as a learning
theory does not focus on repeating knowledge, but on constructing knowledge. Students synthesize new concepts
based on the knowledge they have which means that knowledge is closely related to cognitive development. The
student creates his knowledge based on beliefs, his own experience, and the mental structures used to interpret
events. According to constructivist theory, students' interests and ideas drive the learning process. Constructivism is
defined as "a philosophical perspective interested in the ways in which human beings individually and collectively
interpret or construct the social and psychological world in specific linguistic, social, and historical contexts." In
language learning, constructivism focuses on learning strategies, student beliefs, teacher thinking, and other aspects
that highlight individuality and student outcomes in the learning process. The purpose of this paper is to offer basic
guiding principles of thinking and strategies for technology integration based on constructivist models that affirm
the need for an active position of the student and his expression as a subject that is achieved through his
reproductive and creative activity in English for Specific Purposes teaching.
References
Anderson, R.C., Katz-Buonincontro, J., Bousselot, T., Mattson, D., Beard, N., Land, J., et al. (2022). How am I a creative teacher? Beliefs, values, and affect for intergrating creativity in the classroom. Teach. Teach.Educ. 110:103583.doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103583
Bagley, C. & Hunter, B. (1992). Restructuring, constructivism, and technology: Forging a new relationship. Educational Technology, 22-27.
Bardac, S., & Obradovic, J. (2019). Observing teachers’ displays and scaffolding of executive functioning in the classroom context. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 62,205-219. Doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2018.12.004
Brau, B. (2018). Constructivism. In R. Kimmons, The Students’ Guide to Learning Design and Research.EdTech Books.
Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for
constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Cirriculum Development.
Confrey, J. (1995). How Compatible are Radical Constructivism, Sociocultural Approaches,
and Social Constructivism? In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Ed.) Constructivisim in Education.
Hover: UK.
Dalgarno, B. (2001). Interpretations of constructivism and consequences for couputer assisted
learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 183-194.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Du Plessis, A. E. (2019). Barriers to effective management of diversity in classroom context: the out-of-field teaching phenomenon. Int. J. Educ. Res. 93,136-152.doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2018.11.002
Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (Eds.). (1992). Constructivism and the technology of
instruction: A conversation. Hillsdate, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dwyer, D. (1994). Apple classrooms of tomorrow: What we’ve learned. Educational
Leadership, 51(7), 4-10.
Hong,H.-Y.,Lin,P.-Y., & Lee, Y.-H. (2019). Developing effective knowledge –building environments through constructivist teaching beliefs and technology –integration knowledge: a survey of middle-school teachers in northern Taiwan. Learn. Individ. Dif. 76:101787.doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101787
Liu, S., Lu, J., & Yin, H. (2022). Can professional learning communities promote teacher innovation? A multilevel moderated mediation analysis. Teach. Teach. Educ.
Mohammed, S. H., & Kinyo, L. (2020). The Role of Contructivism in the Enhancement od Social Studies Education. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7, 249-256.
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemp. Educ. Psycho. 60:101832. Doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832 109:103571.doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103571
Valckx, J., Vanderlinde, R., & Devos, G. (2021). Measuring and exploring the structure of teachers’ educational beliefs. Stud. Educ. Eval. 70:101018.doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101018
